Members of the prosecution panel in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte said the prosecution is not expected to be neutral after Sen. Robin Padilla remarked that it should not be “one-sided.”
Padilla, an ally of Duterte, made the remark during the Senate impeachment proceedings on Wednesday, July 22, as the trial over the impeachment charges against the vice president continued.
Responding to the senator’s comment, lead prosecutor Rep. Gerville “Jinky Bitrics” Luistro said it would be more surprising if the prosecution were neutral.
“Siguro mas nakakapagtaka kapag naging neutral ang prosecution. At siguro mas nakakapagtaka kung ide-defend namin ‘yung respondent,” Luistro said.
In a separate radio interview on Wednesday, the lawmaker reiterated this stance, calling for the senator-judges’ “political-neutrality.”
“If ever mayroon ditong dapat maging neutral, dapat hindi one-sided, eh let us remind our countrymen, ‘yun po ‘yung mga senator- judges na dapat nasa gitna lang sila,” she told DZMM.
“For the prosecution and the defense it is natural that they are biased because they have their respective positions. But for the senator- judges, maliwanag po ‘yan. Ang mandato ay political neutrality, ibig sabihin wala kayong kikilingan regardless of political affiliations sa gitna lang tayo,” she added.
Private prosecutor Lorna Kapunan echoed the point, saying both the prosecution and the defense are expected to advocate for their respective positions before the Senate impeachment court.
“’Yun ang quote of the day. Prosecution should really be one-sided, hindi ba? ‘Yun ang task ng prosecution. The defense is also one-sided because they have to prove the defense, ‘di ba? So, both sides should be one-sided,” Kapunan told reporters after the ninth day of the trial.
Kapunan also said the prosecution panel was “very happy” with the presentation of its final witness for Article IV of the impeachment complaint, which alleges grave threat.
“We’re very happy because I think, as Jinky said, as our lead prosecutor, there was even no need for redirect examination. We are happy that through our evidence, we were able to prove betrayal of public trust,” she said.
The prosecution panel concluded its presentation of evidence for Article IV after the testimony of National Bureau of Investigation Director Melvin Matibag, its final witness for the article.
The impeachment trial against Duterte stems from articles approved by the House of Representatives, which include allegations of grave threats and inciting to sedition, alleged misuse of public funds and alleged unexplained wealth.
READ: House panel finds probable cause to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte
Meanwhile, political commentator Jesus Falcis said Padilla later clarified that his remark about the prosecution being “one-sided” referred to witnesses compared with senators facing pending cases. Falcis disputed the explanation, writing: “One, NBI agents aren’t suspended by the Plunder law unlike Senators Jinggoy and Marcoleta. Two, palusot yan.”
He was referring to Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Rodante Marcoleta. Estrada was arrested detained for plunder and graft charges related to anomalous flood-control projects, while Marcoleta was detained over non-bailable plunder charges and violations of Presidential Decree No. 46, which prohibits public officials from receiving gifts, in connection with an alleged P75 million in undeclared campaign contributions he accepted prior to the 2025 national and local elections.
The Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, continues to hear the prosecution’s case and will resume its proceeding on July 29, two days after the fifth State of the Nation Address of President Ferdinand Marcos. Jr.
